Olympics Pics

On January 13, the Olympic Torch made its way through Edmonton en route to Vancouver. I saw the torch relay at the Alberta Legislature point on the route. I chose that point because I also knew there was going to be a protest by anti-Olympic demonstrators. Such demonstrations have been happening all along the route and bigger protests are in the works in Vancouver. The points of contention have to do with Aboriginal land claims; corporate sponsorships (and the nasty things those corporations are involved with when they aren't making themselves look good by sponsoring big events); the environmental impact of the Olympics; and issues surrounding poverty and homelessness in the area around the Olympics. I also learned that the torch ceremony is not part of the Olympics' history, but was started by the Nazis in the 1936 games. I was shocked. My beef with the Olympics is that I am against encouraging competition, nationalism, and yes, I agree with a lot of the points of the protesters. Still, I took some photos - and I even got one of the flame.

The New Art Gallery of Alberta

I took a tour of the new Art Gallery of Alberta building, along with around 30 of my fellow Edmonton bloggers and social media users. We represented a slice of life, from art lovers to professional journalists to people who don't really care about art at all.

The new building has a very modern design on the outside and inside, and I enjoyed the opportunity to get some structural and abstract shots of the architecture. I also had a great time going out on the terrace and taking some cityscapes from that vantage point.

It would have been nice to see a sneak preview of the actual exhibits, even though they were not totally set up yet. The exhibits of work by portrait photographer Karsh and depictions of war by Goya especially intrigued me. But I guess I will have to save that for another visit.

Here is my photoset from the event.

Defining the Centre

When I was in University, I remember in one of my English classes discussing literature in relation to the mainstream. Much of what we studied veered from this place marker, towards directions that were described as post-modern or alternative. Queries sometimes came up as to what exactly this "mainstream" was.

Today, in Alberta's political scene, we tend to look at things from either right or left perspectives, the depth of which is measured by how far one veers from the "centre." Whether someone is a right-wing extremist, a left-wing liberal, or simply middle of the road, all depends on the relationship of that person with the almighty centre.

I've been involved in the discussion of defining a progressive, in terms of trying to effect change in this province. I am starting to believe that the more relevant question might be: what is the centre?

If we do not have a fixed vantage point for the middle ground, then we're all going to have different views on where someone stands on the issues. In that case, any arguments over what defines a progressive or how one can be socially liberal versus economically conservative (and vice versa) becomes simply a matter of perspective without any sort of grounding.

I have been told that my definition of the centre may be off somewhat, mainly due to my involvement in left-wing politics and the activist scene. I disagree,and not for any political reason. I simply do not know what the centre is anymore.

I used to view the centre as exactly that: halfway between the right and left wings. Middle of the road on all things social and economic. Yet to me now, this definition sounds more like that of a fence sitter than political perspective.

Today, "centre" could be something which no longer exists, like the old Progressive Conservative point of view, back when the party actually took heed of the first part of its name. Or maybe it is the Liberals, who tend to do a lot of flip flopping of their own. Maybe the centre is no longer defined by any specific political party.

One of my activist friends said that the centre is whatever the dominant group in power says it is, with everyone else being marginalized. With the Conservatives still in power, and a new party emerging that is even further to the right (Wild Rose Alliance), the centre itself might be something that can shift.

That being said, does any political perspective stay as it is, or change based upon the party in power and culture of society? I think the culture is very important in answering these questions. I know people from the southern United States where conservative people there make conservative people up here look like hippies.

Alberta has been known as being quite conservative for a number of decades. As a result, people who wave peace signs and demonstrate for change can look a bit wild. Never mind the way we are in our personal lives - we're subversive.

We need a clearly defined middle ground if there is any hope of successful dialogue leading to a better future. Otherwise, we will always be in a battle between the vague "mainstream" and the misunderstood "extremists."

Adaptation

Working as a freelance journalist has never been as difficult as it is today. Print publications are folding day after day, as online media proliferates at an exponential pace. Put simply, the industry is going down the tubes and up on wifi.

Many of the print publications where I used to publish are long gone, going, or soon to go. More and more of my work has been for online sources, and even the exiting print ones have a serious online presence. Some of that has been my own doing, such as getting Boyle McCauley News established on Twitter and other social media venues. Social media has become the top way in which I network and find jobs. It has been a form of self-publishing, activism, therapy, and research.

These said jobs are becoming more finite in number and requiring involvement in social media and at least some basic technological skills, like knowing how to maintain a blog. You cannot be a Luddite anymore it work in media. Writers, artists, musicians, creative folks of all kind - we have to be willing to embrace social media or get left behind. There is no choice, save for changing careers.

The future of publishing is bittersweet. I have considered buying a Kindle, not because I simply want to ride the technology wave and get the latest toy (that's why I got an iPod), but because I fear we're heading to the point where electronic versions of books and magazines will become the easiest, fastest, and least expensive way of acquiring literature.

If print media should ever become totally redundant, I will mourn. Speaking fully as someone who sometimes appears to have more of a life online than off, I love books. I love magazines. I love the feeling of holding something solid in my hands, the breeze of pages flipping, the smell of freshly printed newspaper. There is something romantic about cuddling up in bed with a good book. I am not sure an electronic reading device would hold the same allure.

That said, progress will be what it is and as a writer, I am willing to adapt.

An Activist By Any Other Name . . .

I am often called an activist. However, I started to wonder what this term really means.

"Activism" and "left-wing politics" tend to go hand in hand. I'm someone who is involved in the peace movement, the environment, and poverty/homelessness. I am active in these causes. Ergo, I am an activist.

However, what about someone who is active with pro-life (anti-abortion) causes? Or who supports the "sanctity of marriage" (anti-gay rights)? Are these people activists, albeit on the other side of the spectrum? Of course they are.

Then, there are people who work for causes that are neither the property of the left or right. Parents who unite against a school closing. Neighbours who get together to form a community watch program. Are these people activists? I would say, very much so.

I find that when the term "activist" is applied to someone to the right, it is qualified with the kind of activist they are. I have heard numerous people referred to as a "pro-life activist" or "an activist for the family" (as if to imply that those of us more to the left don't advocate for our families!).

I have had qualifiers added to my activist moniker (particularly "peace activist), but in most cases, people simply refer to me as an activist. I admit, when I am told about someone else and am told that person is an activist, thoughts of marches and rallies pop into my head. (Although that is not an entirely accurate stereotype either, as there are indeed marches and rallies for right-wing causes).

However, the true definition of an activist is exactly what the word implies: someone who stands up for a cause. The question is then, the type of activist a person is. That is why the English language has adjectives.